3 ms·

Can we stop with "github" narrative? I remember choosing git vs hg back when github wasn't a thing yet. We chose git on its own merits - it was much faster and

by theamk 5y ago

Can we stop with "github" narrative? I remember choosing git vs hg back when github wasn't a thing yet. We chose git on its own merits - it was much faster and had much better support for editing commits (it mattered for our code review processs). I am sure our org was not the only one. (FWIW, I think hg may have caught up in those areas.. But this is too late now.)

throwaway894345 5y ago
Well, I don't think it's mere "narrative". I'm sure Git has its merits--performance, for example--but I seriously doubt this factored into most orgs' calculus considering most orgs probably wouldn't have hit any serious performance issues with hg. I strongly suspect that Git's popularity has a lot more to do with GitHub (and to a lesser extent, the popularity of the Linux kernel) than it did to any actual merit, but I don't think there's any evidence one way or another.
- christophilus 5y ago
  Mercurial had its own GitHub, though. Was it bitbucket? I don’t remember, but it had an equivalent, I think. I really think Linux and performance was a key factor. Edit: I preferred hg, too, for the record.
  - throwaway894345 5y ago
    BitBucket eventually came to support Mercurial (in addition to Git and maybe others) but it was quite a long time after GitHub had been on the scene.
    - code_biologist 5y ago
      You misremember: The version control software market has evolved a lot since Bitbucket began in 2008. When we launched, centralized version control was the norm and we only supported Mercurial repos. https://bitbucket.org/blog/sunsetting-mercurial-support-in-bitbucket https://bitbucket.org/blog/sunsetting-mercurial-support-in-b... Github was launched in April 2008 [1]. Bitbucket is harder to find, but was definitely around by June 2008 [2]. Mercurial vs git was definitely the defining difference between the two initially, though the Rails ecosystem exploding onto Github made a huge adoption difference. git being faster + built in support for rebasing was big was well. [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20160409191635/http://www.startlin.es/timelines/github/ https://web.archive.org/web/20160409191635/http://www.startl... [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20110317200833/http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/DjangoSuccessStoryBitbucket https://web.archive.org/web/20110317200833/http://code.djang...
      - throwaway894345 5y ago
        Fair enough, bitbucket hit my radar years after GitHub despite me using hg and not git.

by theamk 5y ago

throwaway894345 5y ago

Well, I don't think it's mere "narrative". I'm sure Git has its merits--performance, for example--but I seriously doubt this factored into most orgs' calculus considering most orgs probably wouldn't have hit any serious performance issues with hg. I strongly suspect that Git's popularity has a lot more to do with GitHub (and to a lesser extent, the popularity of the Linux kernel) than it did to any actual merit, but I don't think there's any evidence one way or another.

christophilus 5y ago
Mercurial had its own GitHub, though. Was it bitbucket? I don’t remember, but it had an equivalent, I think. I really think Linux and performance was a key factor. Edit: I preferred hg, too, for the record.
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  BitBucket eventually came to support Mercurial (in addition to Git and maybe others) but it was quite a long time after GitHub had been on the scene.
  - code_biologist 5y ago
    You misremember: The version control software market has evolved a lot since Bitbucket began in 2008. When we launched, centralized version control was the norm and we only supported Mercurial repos. https://bitbucket.org/blog/sunsetting-mercurial-support-in-bitbucket https://bitbucket.org/blog/sunsetting-mercurial-support-in-b... Github was launched in April 2008 [1]. Bitbucket is harder to find, but was definitely around by June 2008 [2]. Mercurial vs git was definitely the defining difference between the two initially, though the Rails ecosystem exploding onto Github made a huge adoption difference. git being faster + built in support for rebasing was big was well. [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20160409191635/http://www.startlin.es/timelines/github/ https://web.archive.org/web/20160409191635/http://www.startl... [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20110317200833/http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/DjangoSuccessStoryBitbucket https://web.archive.org/web/20110317200833/http://code.djang...
    - throwaway894345 5y ago
      Fair enough, bitbucket hit my radar years after GitHub despite me using hg and not git.